• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Does anyone think I'm an ISFJ?

Is Greenfairy an ISFJ?


  • Total voters
    11

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
When I argue a point with you, I feel like I'm trying to pick my way through a bowl of goulash. You try to talk the talk and use the right vocabulary, but the ideas are not balanced in nuance with each other, no actual argument is really being built. It's just assorted details jumbled around in a bowl based on how they feel to you at the time or based on how you want to view yourself. That is my impression. It all makes sense to you, but won't make sense to someone who is not you. That's not Ti.

Te also rebutts points without looking at a bigger conceptual picture. I scan a lot of your most recent posts as some version of Te, just filtered through other functions.

Te-dom, however, looks at the big picture if N is the supporting function. Jung says that Te is oriented toward objective facts, either concrete facts (S) or objective ideals (N).

As for the previous paragraph, awesome, just awesome. I have actually compared you to Greenfairy in my mind before, and found no basis for comparison really.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Well, you have asked a lot of people what they think, and that's something I did too, but the key thing is that I actually listened!
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't know what you're getting at here.

You have to be individuated before you can have a dominant function. What makes you think you're individuated enough to have a dominant function?
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
What I am trying to do is figure out where I am going wrong in my reasoning if I am wrong. I have a certain opinion, but I want to make sure it's correct by examining all the things it is based on. When people pose different suggestions I want to examine whether they are correct by picking it apart.

So you might be right in thinking this is Te, since I am focusing on whether a specific thing is true- but at the same time I want to see whether it is true in conjunction with everything else which is true.

I'm not asserting anything as fact- only putting thoughts out there to see if everything fits. If I am something different than what I think I am everything should fit, and few have been able to form a coherent opinion. So if you believe I am INFP that's great if you can give a convincing argument. Do you think I use Te in the form of the inferior or perhaps tertiary? Do you agree I seem like Ne rather than Ni? Are you basing your Fi decision on comprehensive information or just that it looks like not-Ti? What you've said so far I can't really disagree with.

And this thread wasn't started because I think I'm ISFJ- which I made explicit in the OP. Someone said they thought I was and I wanted to see if anyone else agreed because I was tired of arguing with her. I thought maybe it would be better for other people to do it. Now I'm picking apart people's opinions.

See, case in point: I try to read this post, and it's just one big smear in my head. None of the points are weighted, it's all like white noise to my brain. I want to know what argument you're making, I'm scanning through this, and... well, I have no idea where you're going or what the point is of what you are planning to say. There is no method to the madness. There is no pattern. There is no argument/direction. It just swirls around and around.

I don't really even care what you are, honestly.
I just know what you're not.
(You can cross NTP off the list -- which leaves you with only 14 to go.)

You have to be individuated before you can have a dominant function. What makes you think you're individuated enough to have a dominant function?

In the posts, what I see is a piece of data tossed out (by her or someone else) and immediately negated by another piece of data. It's like there is no preference or weighting of data so that an argument can be made, it's just a jumble.

Maybe your point here is right. Maybe there is not indivuation that would give direction to how perceptions can be weighted consistently. I hadn't thought of that before, per se.
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
I would say INFX. There is a subjective basis for most of the posts I have seen. The INTX, although not always the most logical/objective have a distinct brand of detached rationality I don't sense from you.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Well, you have asked a lot of people what they think, and that's something I did too, but the key thing is that I actually listened!
And that is more along the lines of Te than Ti, as Te trusts external authority and Ti forms their own opinions. How am I not listening if I am questioning the validity of what is being said?

You have to be individuated before you can have a dominant function. What makes you think you're individuated enough to have a dominant function?

I didn't get from what was written in the link you posted that lack of individuation means you don't have a dominant function, but then again Jung doesn't usually make much sense to me anyway. My understanding was that everyone has a dominant function; but maybe that's incorrect. I guess if I don't that could solve everything right there. Would that mean also that I don't have a set of four which have specific dynamics with one another, that they are just swimming around in my psyche like fish, or that there is a set order from which they deviate unusually?
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
And thanks people for taking this opportunity to be gratuitously insulting. Seems like this is what is admired and respected on the forum.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
See, case in point: I try to read this post, and it's just one big smear in my head. None of the points are weighted, it's all like white noise to my brain. I want to know what argument you're making, I'm scanning through this, and... well, I have no idea where you're going or what the point is of what you are planning to say. There is no method to the madness. There is no pattern. There is no argument/direction. It just swirls around and around.

I don't really even care what you are, honestly.
I just know what you're not.
(You can cross NTP off the list -- which leaves you with only 14 to go.)



In the posts, what I see is a piece of data tossed out (by her or someone else) and immediately negated by another piece of data. It's like there is no preference or weighting of data so that an argument can be made, it's just a jumble.

Maybe your point here is right. Maybe there is not indivuation that would give direction to how perceptions can be weighted consistently. I hadn't thought of that before, per se.
Ok.

Point #1: You are incorrect in the part of your post to which I was replying. What you said I was doing is not what I was doing. I instead listed what I was doing. How is that not clear?

Point # 2: I asked if anyone saw Te in my posts. You said you did, I said you might be right. That should be clear as well.

Point # 3: In my mind an opinion should be based on things which are true fitting together. Being XNTP produces the fewest inconsistencies with what I think I know about myself. Other people may have a different understanding of the functions and attribute things about me to different functions, so I am always open to new perspectives. If I am to agree with someone else's opinion it should have the same level of coherence. I prompt people to respond to what I think is inconsistent with their opinion, and evaluate the response.

Point #4: I asked you to flesh out your opinion.

Point #5: Reiterating the purpose of the OP about which you seem to be confused.

Does that clarify things?
I don't really even care what you are, honestly.
I just know what you're not.
(You can cross NTP off the list -- which leaves you with only 14 to go.)
Evidently you do care then, because you care about me not being one of 2.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
And that is more along the lines of Te than Ti, as Te trusts external authority and Ti forms their own opinions. How am I not listening if I am questioning the validity of what is being said?



I didn't get from what was written in the link you posted that lack of individuation means you don't have a dominant function, but then again Jung doesn't usually make much sense to me anyway. My understanding was that everyone has a dominant function; but maybe that's incorrect. I guess if I don't that could solve everything right there. Would that mean also that I don't have a set of four which have specific dynamics with one another, that they are just swimming around in my psyche like fish, or that there is a set order from which they deviate unusually?

Concerning your post #48, I already knew you couldn't take criticism (Fe). Although I'll admit that Poimandres was basing some statements on negative stereotyping.

Now can we get back on topic, please? The following IS important to you. Consider the constellations in the night sky as a metaphor for individuation. At first you see only a bunch of stars (the collective personality), but eventually you begin to see shapes and patterns. (I'm not necessarily talking about astrology here.) These patterns begin to form what we call constellations. These are patterns distinct from the rest of the star field.

I'm not saying that individuation is about focusing on certain personality traits. It's about bringing forth certain traits from the unconscious and making these traits individual to you, part of your uniqueness.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Concerning your post #48, I already knew you couldn't take criticism (Fe). Although I'll admit that Poimandres was basing some statements on negative stereotyping.

Now can we get back on topic, please? The following IS important to you. Consider the constellations in the night sky as a metaphor for individuation. At first you see only a bunch of stars (the collective personality), but eventually you begin to see shapes and patterns. (I'm not necessarily talking about astrology here.) These patterns begin to form what we call constellations. These are patterns distinct from the rest of the star field.

I'm not saying that individuation is about focusing on certain personality traits. It's about bringing forth certain traits from the unconscious and making these traits individual to you, part of your uniqueness.
Good metaphor. So you're saying...that there is not consistency in what comes out of my unconsciousness and there's no pattern to what I make part of myself?

That kind of sounds like the opposite of Fi though. People always say Fi strives for internal consistency of character or value or something.


I think I can take criticism if it seems neutral in tone, like this is something about what I do that isn't working. What I have seen on this thread does not seem neutral. Maybe I'm projecting judgment onto it. Were you saying that is me being Fe or that I can't handle Fe?
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Good metaphor. So you're saying...that there is not consistency in what comes out of my unconsciousness and there's no pattern to what I make part of myself?

That kind of sounds like the opposite of Fi though. People always say Fi strives for internal consistency of character or value or something.

Your psyche is based more in the collective unconscious than in your individual, conscious self. If you lack a dominant characteristic, then the pattern is still trying to emerge from your unconscious self. Jung calls this "constellating," which is a product of an unconscious function brought forth by interaction with your conscious environment. The "constellation" which is (or could become) your dominant function is still part of the conglomeration of functions which lie in the unconscious, but it functions more consciously and volitionally with the environment. Parts of yourself which do not rise from the unconscious by your own will are in a constant state of flux, like the chaos that existed in the universe before there were any laws of physics.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Good metaphor. So you're saying...that there is not consistency in what comes out of my unconsciousness and there's no pattern to what I make part of myself?

That kind of sounds like the opposite of Fi though. People always say Fi strives for internal consistency of character or value or something.


I think I can take criticism if it seems neutral in tone, like this is something about what I do that isn't working. What I have seen on this thread does not seem neutral. Maybe I'm projecting judgment onto it. Were you saying that is me being Fe or that I can't handle Fe?

I suggest that every time someone talks about you personally, even if in an attempt to be helpful, you not only take it as an insult, but I think you are seeing everybody whose opinion you ask as a proxy parent. You are looking for approval and not getting it.

Fe is far more likely to have that pattern than Fi. So while your patterns do exist, they aren't based on an individual sense of self-worth. Being reactive to the environment, they are as unpredictable as the environment you're in. You will then attempt to surround yourself with a predictable environment in order to keep the flux under control. That is auxiliary Je, in this case, Fe.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
And thanks people for taking this opportunity to be gratuitously insulting. Seems like this is what is admired and respected on the forum.

Oh. Sorry. That was so INTP of you -- i've made a terrible mistake.

(I'm kind of surprised you felt the need to slander the entire forum, though.)

Ok.

Point #1: You are incorrect in the part of your post to which I was replying. What you said I was doing is not what I was doing. I instead listed what I was doing. How is that not clear?

Point # 2: I asked if anyone saw Te in my posts. You said you did, I said you might be right. That should be clear as well.

Point # 3: In my mind an opinion should be based on things which are true fitting together. Being XNTP produces the fewest inconsistencies with what I think I know about myself. Other people may have a different understanding of the functions and attribute things about me to different functions, so I am always open to new perspectives. If I am to agree with someone else's opinion it should have the same level of coherence. I prompt people to respond to what I think is inconsistent with their opinion, and evaluate the response.

Point #4: I asked you to flesh out your opinion.

Point #5: Reiterating the purpose of the OP about which you seem to be confused.

Does that clarify things?

No, it doesn't. One thing I've noticed in your posting history is that your attempts to clarify usually just obfuscate the matter further. I mean, none of your answers (1) say anything differently or (2) say anything, really, content-wise. It's all the same vague circular commentary that occurred earlier.

Evidently you do care then, because you care about me not being one of 2.

Oh alas, humiliated again by your powerful logix.

Anyway, take my comments seriously for a moment. Your username is actually very apt, and I don't mean that in any kind of judging way, it just is what it is:

You're very much like a little green fairy, puttering about like a butterfly in a beautiful garden, sipping nectar from flowers and humming and talking to yourself and whoever might pass by. These conversations tend to manifests more as musings, with no real direct in mind. You seem to be focused on an inner world that only you really see. When someone asks a question, you can either agree with them (if it matches up with your inner vision) or you immediately push back (if it doesn't match), but you're not really listening to what is being said and evaluating it on its own merits by some type of process logic, you're just responding to how it matches up with your inner world.

You rather like to remain absorbed in your inner reality and keep a placid calm outer world. on occasion, if prodded enough, you'll become annoyed and splash social water in someone's direction for a moment, then go back to your normal behavior.

Whatever type that is, that's what you are.

Your psyche is based more in the collective unconscious than in your individual, conscious self. If you lack a dominant characteristic, then the pattern is still trying to emerge from your unconscious self. Jung calls this "constellating," which is a product of an unconscious function brought forth by interaction with your conscious environment. The "constellation" which is (or could become) your dominant function is still part of the conglomeration of functions which lie in the unconscious, but it functions more consciously and volitionally with the environment. Parts of yourself which do not rise from the unconscious by your own will are in a constant state of flux, like the chaos that existed in the universe before there were any laws of physics.

I suggest that every time someone talks about you personally, even if in an attempt to be helpful, you not only take it as an insult, but I think you are seeing everybody whose opinion you ask as a proxy parent. You are looking for approval and not getting it.

Fe is far more likely to have that pattern than Fi. So while your patterns do exist, they aren't based on an individual sense of self-worth. Being reactive to the environment, they are as unpredictable as the environment you're in. You will then attempt to surround yourself with a predictable environment in order to keep the flux under control. That is auxiliary Je, in this case, Fe.

Mal, we tend to disagree on some things strongly, but here I think you have done an excellent job in perceiving and explaining what's going on. In fact, I think you are getting at something similar to what I am trying to get at, just in very different ways. I appreciate you offering yet another framework for looking at this.

I'm nodding a LOT when you mention "based more in collective unconscious," and "approval seeking" and the connection to Fe.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Mal, we tend to disagree on some things strongly, but here I think you have done an excellent job in perceiving and explaining what's going on. In fact, I think you are getting at something similar to what I am trying to get at, just in very different ways. I appreciate you offering yet another framework for looking at this.

I'm nodding a LOT when you mention "based more in collective unconscious," and "approval seeking" and the connection to Fe.

I don't think we disagree that much.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
You mean the part that goes, "and I don't believe I'm SFJ, so there you have it"?

Which type holds that belief is more important that facts and reason?

It's the whole flow of the post hopping from one thing to another - all connected ideas and thoughts.

No use overcomplicating all of this.

[MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] I do think it seems unlikely you are an NTP as you can see in this thread how they think :)
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It's the whole flow of the post hopping from one thing to another - all connected ideas and thoughts.

I think you may overcomplicate things.

No INTP would do such a thing!
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] I do think it seems unlikely you are an NTP as you can see in this thread how they think :)
Maybe. But it's also true that there are only 3 who are participating, which is hardly a representative sample.

you're INFP, deal with it

So what, I'm just supposed to assume I use Fi and inferior Te and just forget about logic and reasoning? I'm becoming more open to the idea, but I'm not yet convinced. And not everyone thinks I'm INFP, not even the majority.

No, it doesn't. One thing I've noticed in your posting history is that your attempts to clarify usually just obfuscate the matter further. I mean, none of your answers (1) say anything differently or (2) say anything, really, content-wise. It's all the same vague circular commentary that occurred earlier.
Well, I really do try to make my thoughts clear, so I'm sorry I'm incapable of doing that for you and some other people. As you mention below, I usually don't really have an argument perse, just thoughts. They aren't directed toward a certain conclusion. That may be why you are frustrated looking for one. If I do have an argument I haven't had much trouble communicating it in situations in which it matters. I try to reserve judgment on things usually. And fwiw I have just as much trouble following some other people on the forum, without any pattern in type.
Anyway, take my comments seriously for a moment. Your username is actually very apt, and I don't mean that in any kind of judging way, it just is what it is:

You're very much like a little green fairy, puttering about like a butterfly in a beautiful garden, sipping nectar from flowers and humming and talking to yourself and whoever might pass by. These conversations tend to manifests more as musings, with no real direct in mind. You seem to be focused on an inner world that only you really see. When someone asks a question, you can either agree with them (if it matches up with your inner vision) or you immediately push back (if it doesn't match), but you're not really listening to what is being said and evaluating it on its own merits by some type of process logic, you're just responding to how it matches up with your inner world.

You rather like to remain absorbed in your inner reality and keep a placid calm outer world. on occasion, if prodded enough, you'll become annoyed and splash social water in someone's direction for a moment, then go back to your normal behavior.

Whatever type that is, that's what you are.
I think this is a more or less accurate description.
 
Top